New Delhi: Team India head coach Gautam Gambhir didn’t hold back as he criticized England skipper Ben Stokes over the ‘handshake’ controversy on Day 5 of the fourth Test at Old Trafford. With just 15 overs left and the match heading toward a draw, Stokes suggested ending the contest early. However, Indian batters Ravindra Jadeja and Washington Sundar were both in their 90s, prompting India to decline the offer. The match continued, and both players went on to score unbeaten centuries — Jadeja (107*) and Sundar (101*).
Speaking at the post-match press conference, Gambhir firmly supported the decision, questioning whether England would have done the same.
“If someone’s batting on 90 and another on 85, don’t they deserve their centuries? Would England have walked off if their own players were close to milestones? No. Our boys weathered the storm. They earned those tons. We’re not here to please anyone,” Gambhir asserted.
India had a tough start to their second innings, losing both openers — Yashasvi Jaiswal and Sai Sudharsan — for ducks. But the middle order rose to the occasion with Shubman Gill (103), KL Rahul (90), Jadeja, and Sundar leading the fightback, ending the innings at 425 for 4 in 143 overs and salvaging a draw after trailing by 311 runs.
Gill backed the decision to continue playing.
“Definitely it was up to the boys, but we thought they batted brilliantly. Both of them were in their 90s, so they deserved their centuries,” he said during the presentation.
“Day five wicket, every ball is an event. We just wanted to go deep, play ball by ball, and take the result out of the equation,” he added.
Gambhir vs Stokes: The Injury Replacement Debate
The clash between Gambhir and Stokes didn’t stop there. Another debate erupted over the possible introduction of an ‘injury replacement’ rule, after Indian wicketkeeper Rishabh Pant fractured his toe and couldn’t keep wickets, though he batted bravely in the first innings.
Stokes dismissed the idea outright, calling it “absolutely ridiculous.”
“You pick 11 players for a game. Injuries are part of it. Creating a law for injury replacement opens up too many loopholes. That conversation should be shut down,” Stokes stated bluntly.
Gambhir, however, argued for the rule, stressing that match officials should be empowered to approve replacements in genuine cases.
“Absolutely, I’m all for it — if umpires and match referees determine it’s a serious injury. Especially in a hard-fought series like this, you can’t expect a team to continue with 10 players. That would be unfair,” he said.
“If a player is visibly injured, there should be a mechanism to allow a replacement. It’s about fairness, not exploitation,” Gambhir concluded.
The fourth Test may have ended in a draw, but the drama — both on and off the field — continues to fuel intense debate in the cricketing world.
